I most definitely don’t think the legal drinking age should be lowered. Teenagers and those younger than 21 already have so many changes going on and so many new responsibilities. It’s the time when you start figuring out how to do things on your own and how to be responsible for yourself. There is also just so much learning and molding of a person going on in their younger years. I don’t think adding intoxication to this list of new things would have the most positive outcome. Besides, our bodies are still developing before 21. There could be considerable damage done because our systems are just not ready to handle alcohol consumption. Granted, it’s not uncommon for someone underage to not adhere to the law. The video posted discussed the
Lowering the legal drinking age would create problems such as infringing on the mental and physical development of the young drinker. As a respected author, Matt Nagin puts it, “The late teens and early twenties are formative years where character building, leadership in the community, and scholastic excellence should be emphasized. Alcohol detracts from all of these.” In other words, Nagin believes that the teen years are an imperative time of growth in a person’s life. Scientists have proven that the brain is not fully developed until the age of twenty five. If Nagin’s argument is correct, and I believe it is, then people should understand that scientists have proven the negative affects that alcohol has on the development of the brain. Alcohol has the power to kill brain cells and damage growth hormones. By making alcohol legally accessible to an eighteen year old, we are literally poisoning his or her brain.
Which may cause some issues. An article by New York Times “Lowering the Drinking Age Has Serious Consequences” by Tara Watson explains the only reason why the drinking age was raised to 21 was because of the serious issues happening on a daily basis. “…when many states moved from minimum of 18 to 21. Our study found that a lower drinking age was associated with a statistically higher risk of unintended pregnancy and… worse infant health.” (Watson) Not only was unintended pregnancy the only issue happening Watson also explains there will mostly likely be higher crime rates to last much longer, and this is all associated with alcohol. Not only does Watson explain that lowering the drinking age limit has and will cause a huge impact psychologically it will cause young adults to binge drink as they get older. Furthermore, having the availability to drink as a young adult will cause huge impacts such as fatal car accidents, unwanted pregnancy, and higher crime
Lowering the drinking age to 18 would make a lot of sense in the world. Lowering the drinking age to 18 would make more sense. It would be better for the teens that drink on college campus. The drinking age should be lowered to 18 because you can vote at eighteen, buy tobacco, it’ll reduce the thrill of breaking the law, evidence supports that early introduction of drinking is the safest way to reduce juvenile alcohol abuse, and college people that are not 21 drink also.
Sarah, an eighteen-year-old college freshman, walks into a convenience store and moves timidly to the back, hoping that no one she knows will see her. Opening the refrigerator door, she pulls out a chilled case of Coors Light. Sarah nervously approaches the cashier, with her fake ID ready to be shown, and places the case of beer on the counter. Upon first sight, the cashier assumes that Sarah is not of legal age to buy beer, because she is petite and looks young. When she places the case on the counter, the cashier asks her for her ID. Sarah, ready to show her seemingly flawless fake form of identification, hands it to him. At first glance, the ID seems to be real, and the date of birth appears correct, but, when looked at closely, the picture does not exactly resemble the underage customer. The cashier identifies this ID as false identification and refuses to sell Sarah the case of Coors Light.
Lowering the drinking age from twenty-one to eighteen is a good idea because it will most likely promote responsibility, alcohol consumption will be more controlled, and, if not done so, it is posing as discrimination against the eighteen to twenty age group; however, lowering the legal drinking age back to eighteen can be fatal because the brains of the eighteen to twenty year old age groups are not fully developed, binge drinking and alcohol addiction rates will go up, and the drinking and driving rates will increase.
When looking at the drinking age in many nations, a trend of relatively young minimum legal drinking ages (MLDA) can be seen around the world. As it stands, all of America’s 50 states employ a MLDA of 21 making America one of only seven countries in the world to have a drinking age set at 21; the oldest age set as the minimum legal drinking age in the world. Where many of our friends in Europe are happily drinking away at 18, many here in America are left wondering why we don’t employ the same age requirement. Why is it that America has set the age so high as opposed to everyone else? How much more dangerous could drinking at 18 be as opposed to 21? The reason that the MLDA in America is so high is not because America is ignorant or controlling in nature but because setting the MLDA at 21 saves lives and encourages more responsible behavior. Lowering the MLDA in America back to 18 would only harm and endanger the health and well-being of the people of this nation and as that is the case, the MLDA should stay at 21.
Even though these are valid points, research shows that reducing the legal age could actually have the opposite effect on the matter. In America, when a person turns eighteen, that person is now considered an adult and is treated like one as well. That person is entrusted with responsibilities such as voting, enlisting in the armed services, opening personal bank accounts and possibly holding public office. If a person can be entrusted with such responsibilities at that particular age, who can say that he/she is not mature enough to drink alcohol?... ...
...e minimum legal drinking age in the United States should remain at twenty-one years old. Since the National Legal Drinking Age Act was ratified, the consumption of liquor among minors has abated significantly. With the restriction in affect, the United States is definitely a safer place when it comes to alcohol use. Even though, the reduction of the drinking age would get rid of the taboo that surrounds alcohol which would result in fewer teens drinking just to be accepted by their peers, young adolescents now have a harder time getting access to alcohol due to the minimum legal drinking age resulting in less alcohol-affiliated problems and a decrease in damage to their bodies. Teens and alcohol are not a good mix so citizens of the United States should keep them separated as best as they can. By having a minimum age limit of twenty-one, that is a great way to do it.
We knocked on the door of the off-campus apartment, as it opened we were confronted with the heavy stench of alcohol. A young girl was passed out on the living room floor, a pile of empty beer cans filled the kitchen sink, and the deafening music rattled the window panes. A group of girls managed to stumble past us. They waved goodbye to the host, who was handing drinks to me and my sister. It was not my first time drinking. In fact, everyone there was quite experienced – after all, it’s college. Half of the guests were completely drunk, and I had no problem with it. That is, until later that night when my sister locked herself in a room with a guy she had met only a week before. This prompted me to seriously consider the effects of alcohol. Would my sister have been able to see the danger of the situation had she been sober? Would the absence of alcohol have prevented the events of that night from occurring? These questions, along with the vivid memory of that night, fueled my examination of the complex social problem of underage drinking.
A political problem that has been argued over since prohibition is the minimum legal drinking age (MLDA). This is a controversial subject because many believe that the legal drinking age should be lowered from 21 to 18 years old. “In the 1970’s the 26th amendment was passed which lowered the legal voting age, this caused 30 US states to lower their MLDA to 18, 19, or 20 which left 14 states with a MLDA of 21 by 1982” (Minimal Legal Drinking Age, 1). But reports later showed an increase in teenage car accidents in states with a lower MLDA; these states soon changed the MLDA back to 21.
Lawmakers should not consider lowering the drinking age from twenty-one to eighteen. Despite the deep value this country places on freedom, personal liberties, and personal responsibilities, the data shows that public safety is greatly at risk if the drinking age were to be lowered to twenty-one. A variety of groups believe that the drinking age should be lowered to eighteen deeming that the twenty-one law is unconstitutional. On the opposing side, people agree that the law helps to protect our young people and the communities where they live.
Should the Minimum Legal Drinking Age of 21 be lowered to the age of 18? After the legal voting age was lowered from 21 to 18 in 1971, 30 US states ended up lowering their MLDA to 18, 19, or 20. When the states started implementing the Minimum Legal Drinking Age, they saved approximately 20,000 lives. They also decreased the number of alcohol-related youth fatalities among drivers by 63 percent since 1982. By 1982, only 14 US states had the MLDA of 21. In 1984, all of the states that have recently lowered their MLDA from 21 have all raised their MLDA back to 21. In 47 of 50 states age 18 is the “age of majority”, but the Minimum Legal Drinking Age is still at the age of 21. The minimum legal drinking age should stay at the age of 21 and not be lowered to 18 because of the medical reasons behind it, and could help prevent traffic accidents from happening.
The controversy on the proper drinking age is one that has been repeatedly discussed and researched over the years. Its common to hear the argument “If someone is old enough to take a bullet for their country, they should be allowed to drink alcohol.” But is that enough justification? Some would say no. “According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) it is estimated that in 2004 there were more than 1,700 student deaths, 599,000 injuries, and 696,000 assaults annually associated with excessive drinking” (Fennell 247). Given these numbers, would lowering the drinking age really be the best thing for America’s youth?
The national minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) of The United States is twenty-one and it is ineffective; therefore it should be lowered to eighteen. The minimum legal drinking age does not prevent underage consumption of alcohol. Lowering the age of consumption can possibly reduce the number of injuries do to underage drinking. The legal age of adulthood in the United States is eighteen, so all adults should be able to make their own decision to drink or not. “Although many believe that anyone under the age of 21 is prohibited from consuming alcohol in the United States, underage drinking is allowed in 29 states if done on private premises with parental consent, 25 states if for religious purposes, and 11 states if for educational purposes.” ("Should the Drinking Age Be Lowered from 21 to a Younger Age?").
With all of the alcohol problems with underage drinking should the drinking age be lowered just to offset the problem. Studies prove that those who drink before age 21 have considerably more alcoholic problems at work, with family, and with police (Lyons 18). If we lower the age too soon without enforcing the punishments way more than we do now then we will just of lowered the age at which kids start drinking. There has to be an off set something that will stop teens from drinking illegally. Therefore it would not be smart to lower the drinking age until the punishment will match the crime. Until that day the drinking age should be maintained at twenty-one.